Wanted to mention some news I heard this weekend that concerns me; thought others would like to know as well. A member of our forum, a police officer, has been told by his employer that he can no longer participate on this or other online gun forums, because they consider this to be engaging in "subversive" activity. And they don't just mean that their officers cannot do this on work time, apparently this means ANY time, even their own time and their own computer during off hours. He said that he would have to end his involvement here, as he was concerned about what would happen to his job otherwise.

Note: I cannot share his name, even his user name, and please don't speculate here in the thread about who it is. Let's just focus on the issue.

Apparently this is a trend that was started recently by a certain state's Dept. of Justice. They're monitoring online activity, and they don't want any law enforcement officers in their pay to be participating in any forums related to guns. I don't know if this is correct, or any of the details, since I've only had the report from this one person. I tried to look around on the web last night to find any public info about the issue, but couldn't find it. If anyone knows more about this--about what this state or any other state may be doing to restrict the off-hours Internet activities of some of their employees--I'd sure be interested to hear it.

My biggest concerns here are these (assuming that what I've been told is correct):

1. That some state governments are actually to the point where they are telling employees what to do in their off-hours, and preventing them from participating in gun forums, even though this is a perfectly legal and recreational type of activity.

2. That they apparently consider involvement in a gun forum to be "subversive" activity. That makes me wonder how many other states, and other types of employers, would think the same way. Just be careful out there.

Later in the thread he confirms:
Unfortunately, it's not just a supervisor. Behind this action is the California Dept. of Justice.

CRTguns

07-29-2007, 1:09 PM

I know of one LE agency in the state that instructed its officers to get rid of their OLL rifles. A few officers actually procured letters allowing the "correct" build of these rifles (aw style). Those officers that did, were instructed to disassemble and dispose of these guns, and that the letters were being revoked.

Also. an LEO from different agency entered my store and told me to remove him from my records- cause his boss told him that he could not be affiliated with a firearms activist group. I appologized that I could not, as I'm required to keep records of everyone who's bought a gun from me.

Not the same thing I guess, but headed in the same direction.
The boss at work telling the workers how to live off work hours.

CRTguns

07-29-2007, 1:13 PM

If I found out that because of my job, I was being monitored at home at night- I'd leave the state. That's scary stuff.
Hey wait- that's totally me!

C.G.

07-29-2007, 1:18 PM

How does Allison get to associate with anti-gunners then?

CRTguns

07-29-2007, 1:21 PM

this is unilateral shat slinging. The rules only work AGAINST us. iIf and when they start to help us, they just change the rules!

bwiese

07-29-2007, 1:21 PM

I know of one LE agency in the state that instructed its officers to get rid of their OLL rifles. A few officers actually procured letters allowing the "correct" build of these rifles (aw style). Those officers that did, were instructed to disassemble and dispose of these guns, and that the letters were being revoked.

Please let us/me know the name of that dept/organization. This could be useful.

shinigami

07-29-2007, 1:28 PM

Wow! talk about saying goodbye to whatever freedom you have left in this state.:banghead:

M. Sage

07-29-2007, 1:34 PM

+1. The Right People need to know about this.

Fjold

07-29-2007, 1:38 PM

They can only get away with this if you let them.

bwiese

07-29-2007, 1:39 PM

I do have some doubts as to the extent of this matter.

Frankly, if this issue heated up we'd likely hear of it here - Calguns is getting a lot of traffic. The fact that this went to a non-CA board, is being discussed by non-Californians, etc. makes things sound like a magnified "third-hole rumor" brought about by a grain of truth.

(As for Calguns, seems like a bunch more passive visitors as well as increased membership. Yes, looks like both a whole new cycle of noobs have joined recently, and it appears a whole 'nuther surge of OLLs has been sold - wouldn't surprise me if we're up to 70,000-ish by now.)

But yes, we can look into it...

M. Sage

07-29-2007, 1:43 PM

Hmm, I haven't heard from some of our LEO members for a while... Hopefully they check in here.

My hope (if this is true): LEOs will start quitting en-masse. C'mon, guys, you can't put up with this crap. If your employer's an a-hole, don't work for him. I'll give you free lessons in auto repair.

Diablo

07-29-2007, 1:49 PM

"subversive activity"? Wow, are we now the enemy?

wilit

07-29-2007, 1:52 PM

I wonder if perhaps this has to do more with if a forum posting LEO arrested one of us, his credibility in court could come into question, rather than the affiliating with a subversive group thing.

Piper

07-29-2007, 1:54 PM

So, the tyranical socialists are in power. The supposed government of the people is attempting to become our rulers through threats and fear. I think it's time to ratchet up the pressure on politicians and tell them to put a leash on their dogs. I for one won't be intimidated.

USMC_2651_E5

07-29-2007, 2:18 PM

I wonder if perhaps this has to do more with if a forum posting LEO arrested one of us, his credibility in court could come into question, rather than the affiliating with a subversive group thing.

A forum posting LEO should know what is legal and what is not. He wouldn't arrest in the first place, unless the weapon in question was configured incorrectly. The LEOs you have to worry about are the ill-informed non-posting types.

Liberty1

07-29-2007, 2:27 PM

Sure it is possible to intimidate some of us but administrators and DOJ should be very wary of taking any action against CA Leo's 1st Amend. rights of association for participation in legal activities and discussions. POA (peace officer association) attorneys are very powerful and effective in protecting their members against such discriminatory and disciplinary action. If my dept. every said anything to me about a legal activity done off duty letters from my legal rep. should give them caution! I'm a public servant on duty but nobody's slave off duty.

Piper

07-29-2007, 2:33 PM

Sure it is possible to intimidate some of us but administrators and DOJ should be very wary of taking any action against CA Leo's 1st Amend. rights of association for participation in legal activities and discussions. POA (peace officer association) attorneys are very powerful and effective in protecting their members against such discriminatory and disciplinary action. If my dept. every said anything to me about a legal activity done off duty letters from my legal rep. should give them caution! I'm a public servant on duty but nobody's slave off duty.

Has anyone checked with PORAC to see how real this is?

50BMGBOB

07-29-2007, 2:39 PM

I remember when after the Oklahoma City bombing the was a news paper story that said the justice dept considered you a subversive if you owned guns and you attend and give money to a church. I guess their logic was that you believed in a power higher than them and had the means to fight back. If that is all it takes I bet almost everyone here is a subversive! But then all of our founding fathers where subversives too. So we are in good company!!

Liberty1

07-29-2007, 3:15 PM

Has anyone checked with PORAC to see how real this is?

Well, unless an officer sued his dept. in civil court all of this would remain an internal matter. So without a specific public source this all remains rumor.

MrLogan

07-29-2007, 3:26 PM

:mad:

Pthfndr

07-29-2007, 3:29 PM

I do have some doubts as to the extent of this matter.

Frankly, if this issue heated up we'd likely hear of it here - Calguns is getting a lot of traffic. The fact that this went to a non-CA board, is being discussed by non-Californians, etc. makes things sound like a magnified "third-hole rumor" brought about by a grain of truth.

(As for Calguns, seems like a bunch more passive visitors as well as increased membership. Yes, looks like both a whole new cycle of noobs have joined recently, and it appears a whole 'nuther surge of OLLs has been sold - wouldn't surprise me if we're up to 70,000-ish by now.)

But yes, we can look into it...

Did you know that the admin - Bill - is located here in CA. I know the guy, and have gone shooting with him. He used to live up here in Eldorado Hills.

Just an FYI.

bwiese

07-29-2007, 3:39 PM

Gol durn, I'm really a radical subversive. I have short hair, shined shoes, a pressed shirt/slacks, a Rolex and mortgage. I don't like communes, sandals or 'natural foods'. I believe hippies smell.

I promulgate my opinions of how to comply with detailed laws so folks can avoid trouble.

If the orig posting is indeed true I think Calguns really got a lot of traction, and we can have some legal fun.

hoffmang

07-29-2007, 4:05 PM

It is extremely important that the identity of the LEA in question gets to Bill or Kes.

-Gene

Kestryll

07-29-2007, 4:15 PM

I have a line on who it is Gene, let me check a few things and I'll get back to you.

Yankee Clipper

07-29-2007, 4:20 PM

Originally Posted by wilit
I wonder if perhaps this has to do more with if a forum posting LEO arrested one of us, his credibility in court could come into question, rather than the affiliating with a subversive group thing.
A forum posting LEO should know what is legal and what is not. He wouldn't arrest in the first place, unless the weapon in question was configured incorrectly. The LEOs you have to worry about are the ill-informed non-posting types.
To put a finer point on it, this forum does not condone nor practice illegal activity. The moderators and the 'head janitor' scrub any post that suggest or advocate such activity. I think it would be difficult, if not absurd, for an officer of the court to attempt such a maneuver.
Re the original post: It wouldn't surprise me that some political animals, such as a chief-of-police would try to push this down to the lower ranks: maybe to curry the favor of higher party members? Then again, control of off the job behavior is not new.

Michael303

07-29-2007, 4:26 PM

I work for a full service city and have buddies all over the spectrum. This includes a few who work over in PD at the Commander or higher level. They are familiar with the OLL related info, and seem interested in acquiring one or two (though a few have some pre-2000 registered purchases). We do extremely through background checks, and would know if post-hire monitoring went on.

That said, I’ve received no info on them checking Calguns or other forums after hire, and no info on being on the look-out for OLL owners as being potential as subversives for fifth columnists.

DrjonesUSA

07-29-2007, 4:27 PM

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

antarius

07-29-2007, 4:47 PM

My department knows all about my OLL building. I educated a Sergeant on how to build an OLL.

I then took my OLL to my Chief and got a letter allowing me to convert it to a true AW and registered it with the DOJ as such.

On topic, in my opinion so long as the officer in question was not promoting the illegal use of firearms, manufacture of assault weapons, or teaching people how to build weapons that fit under the guidelines of an assault weapon, I see no problem.

I'm sure his POA will be involved in this and how he could be seen as "subversive" for informing people of how to properly follow both California and Federal Law while still enjoying our 2nd amendment rights (which he's sworn to protect) is unknown to me. I'd be willing to bet it gets shoved under the rug and goes away.

hoffmang

07-29-2007, 4:51 PM

And some of us around here are pretty good at flattening carpets out to see the rats scurry out form under them.

-Gene

glockman19

07-29-2007, 5:15 PM

And some of us around here are pretty good at flattening carpets out to see the rats scurry out form under them.

YES...PEST CONTROLL:smash:

6172crew

07-29-2007, 5:28 PM

My department knows all about my OLL building. I educated a Sergeant on how to build an OLL.

I then took my OLL to my Chief and got a letter allowing me to convert it to a true AW and registered it with the DOJ as such.

On topic, in my opinion so long as the officer in question was not promoting the illegal use of firearms, manufacture of assault weapons, or teaching people how to build weapons that fit under the guidelines of an assault weapon, I see no problem.

I'm sure his POA will be involved in this and how he could be seen as "subversive" for informing people of how to properly follow both California and Federal Law while still enjoying our 2nd amendment rights (which he's sworn to protect) is unknown to me. I'd be willing to bet it gets shoved under the rug and goes away.
Glad to still see you around, we have had a few out spoken cops on calguns over the years and I hope they continue to come here for education on OLLs and such. God knows the BOF isnt telling in like it is, why not us?

damon1272

07-29-2007, 5:28 PM

[QUOTE=bwiese;692798]I do have some doubts as to the extent of this matter.

and it appears a whole 'nuther surge of OLLs has been sold - wouldn't surprise me if we're up to 70,000-ish by now.)

QUOTE]

Well bwiese I would say that the oll thing is all your fualt. You just had to ask the question. Thank you. :D:43::D:43:

TheMan

07-29-2007, 7:46 PM

- wouldn't surprise me if we're up to 70,000-ish by now.)

I'm doing my part, and aiming for 100K:D

Cali-V

07-29-2007, 7:59 PM

ip blocking...

Kestryll

07-29-2007, 8:33 PM

Gene, check your PMs

oaklander

07-29-2007, 8:54 PM

I'm doing my part, and aiming for 100K:D

A year and a half ago, it was rare to see OLLs at any of the ranges I go to. Now it seems like every other shooter has an OLL.

Good job - CADOJ!!! Thanks Alison!!!

If the story is true about the CADOJ's alleged heavy-handed attempt to surpress an employee's First Amendment right of association, this is just another example of how much traction Calguns, and the whole OLL movement has gotten.

Cat's out of the bag, DOJ.

carsonwales

07-29-2007, 9:27 PM

Please let us/me know the name of that dept/organization. This could be useful.

I was at a certain shop in a certain county and there was an OD LEO there...and we were talking OLL...

Asked if he had ordered one or was planning on it....

"Yes...I get mine next week"

This was on Saturday.....

Even the citizen/cops are sick of this crap....

He was jacked to be able to get one....

Genie is out of the bottle and this will ultimately only further a full overturning of the AWB

Yo Iggy....you lose

CW

carsonwales

07-29-2007, 9:32 PM

wouldn't surprise me if we're up to 70,000-ish by now

70005....and after my trip to the range today armed with print outs from here and the DOJ I more than lit a fire under 6-8 guys about OLL's...

PUSH HARD NOW...

Educate those you meet at the range and show them the Prince/BB/Maglock and explain to them how it meshes with the 'written law'....

Turn the tide gentlemen....

CW

CRTguns

07-29-2007, 9:55 PM

Gol durn, I'm really a radical subversive. I have short hair, shined shoes, a pressed shirt/slacks, a Rolex and mortgage. I don't like communes, sandals or 'natural foods'. I believe hippies smell.

I promulgate my opinions of how to comply with detailed laws so folks can avoid trouble.

If the orig posting is indeed true I think Calguns really got a lot of traction, and we can have some legal fun.

My respect for you has grown Bill- I thought you all were sandal-wearing, falafel-eating, banjo playing, cave-dwelling, hemp-wearing unshaven extremists.

BTW, it was CHP (the guns) and BNE (affifliation)

CRTguns

07-29-2007, 10:07 PM

Carson...

Ya know Iggy browses this site to select his next target. I picked A fight with him last year.
I accused him of what would amount to: tampering with, fabrication of, and the illegal acquisition of evidence- And it's cost me about $15,000.00 to date to back my accusation.

Miiiight not wanna tell him he's lost, till he has really been KO'd of the BOF. He gets a vendetta- or complex about losing. Probably started in grade school playing kickball or tetherball- kids picked on him cause he wasn't any good.

FortCourageArmory

07-29-2007, 10:35 PM

70005....and after my trip to the range today armed with print outs from here and the DOJ I more than lit a fire under 6-8 guys about OLL's...

PUSH HARD NOW...

Educate those you meet at the range and show them the Prince/BB/Maglock and explain to them how it meshes with the 'written law'....

Turn the tide gentlemen....

CW

70,008....I just sold three more last week!!!

pnkssbtz

07-30-2007, 1:43 AM

70,008....I just sold three more last week!!!

Um.... 70,007...

(I had an um... boating accident, yeah...)

*waves at BoF people*

artherd

07-30-2007, 1:47 AM

Carson...

Ya know Iggy browses this site to select his next target. I picked A fight with him last year.
I accused him of what would amount to: tampering with, fabrication of, and the illegal acquisition of evidence- And it's cost me about $15,000.00 to date to back my accusation.

Miiiight not wanna tell him he's lost, till he has really been KO'd of the BOF. He gets a vendetta- or complex about losing. Probably started in grade school playing kickball or tetherball- kids picked on him cause he wasn't any good.

CRT- I do not get into fights or altercations (of any sort). I perfer to use words to fight my battles, and written word at that.

Iggy would be well served to be reminded that we are all on the same 'side' here, that of Law.

SunriseF150

07-30-2007, 9:54 AM

That would be very interesting if the CADOJ is telling LEO's they can't be involved in gun forums and can't have OLL's. When part of their job involves using guns.

lazuris

07-30-2007, 12:32 PM

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

What's this. They don't teach us this stuff in school these days. Oops did i say something that might hurt your self-esteem. i'm so sorry. Gotta go, simple life is on.

bwiese

07-30-2007, 12:50 PM

Kestryll,
Check your email regarding the PM...

Bill

Kestryll

07-30-2007, 1:00 PM

Got it and replied accordingly.

oaklander

07-30-2007, 1:12 PM

If only my current job knew how much time I was spending on the gun boards. They already asked me to quit getting gun catalogs at work, and won't let me do any Pro 2A pro bono on company time. Geez!!!

LUCKILY - they don't care what I do on my own time!

DIG

07-30-2007, 2:30 PM

Wow! talk about saying goodbye to whatever freedom you have left in this state.:banghead:

That's why I'm picking up stakes ...and the housing market. They won't stop at the gun laws, that's just the beginning. Soon just about everything about your life will be :cool2:watched:cool2: and regulated.

LAK Supply

07-30-2007, 4:44 PM

CRT- I do not get into fights or altercations (of any sort). I perfer to use words to fight my battles, and written word at that.

Iggy would be well served to be reminded that we are all on the same 'side' here, that of Law.

Um.... CRT wasn't implying that he literally picked a fight (physical altercation) with Iggy. There were some shady goings-on and CRT called Iggy on them. I do believe that's using the pen/words you are referring to, don't you think?

triggerhappy

07-30-2007, 5:22 PM

LOL! Anyone who lets their employer tell them what to do on their own time, is far more sad than I could ever describe.

There's two words for any boss who attempts this, and the 2nd word is "you".

thedrickel

07-30-2007, 5:24 PM

LOL! Anyone who lets their employer tell them what to do on their own time, is far more sad than I could ever describe.

There's two words for any boss who attempts this, and the 2nd word is "you".

Many, many people let their employer tell them what to do on their own time, including all LEOs. It's called a "drug test."

grywlfbg

07-30-2007, 5:46 PM

Many, many people let their employer tell them what to do on their own time, including all LEOs. It's called a "drug test."

Good point. I don't do illegal drugs (just alcohol for me) but I'm all for their legalization (for a variety of reasons too numerous to list here). If your job impact isn't affected who the F cares what you do on your own time? But the key to this thread is that these LEO's aren't doing anything illegal.

So I would amend triggerhappy's post to say, Anyone who lets their employer tell them they cannot engage in certain legal activities on their own time, is far more sad than I could ever describe.

metalhead357

07-30-2007, 5:56 PM

Many, many people let their employer tell them what to do on their own time, including all LEOs. It's called a "drug test."

While I DO fully agree that this idea of voiding gun establishments I do unfortunately have to play somwhat of Devil's advocate here and say I used to have to say much the same thing to some of my employees; precisely that thier outside activies MAY/WILL get them removed from the job. 1 (ONE) ticket would not be a problem...while two or a DUI infraction would cause them to loose thier job (our insurance would not cover them); likewise with convictions.... something like loitering or vandalism aint that big a deal to us-- but a drug conviction, theft, or assualt/battery charge would also get them removed......... they'd work around people and have access to lots of rather tempting items. As far as the drug-usage concern- our Director couldn't have cared less if they tested positive for cannibus but it was a direct fire (or no hire for 1 year) if they tested positive for anything else (they didn't have a prescription for).

But this...this.....is absurd for an otherwise completely legal/legit activity. God save us all.

M. Sage

07-30-2007, 7:04 PM

LOL! Anyone who lets their employer tell them what to do on their own time, is far more sad than I could ever describe.

There's two words for any boss who attempts this, and the 2nd word is "you".

I knew of a dealership in MI that wouldn't let their techs do ANY outside work. One got fired for installing a stereo for a secretary who worked at the same dealership. Dealers don't install stereos!

Do not be intimidated. We will stand by you the same way we stand by BlackwaterOPS. Stay within the letter of the law, but do not give up your rifles or your friends. Bullet buttons and fixed mags are within the letter of the law. The law is wrong, but we don't fight it by breaking it. We work for change from within the system, and owning and building OLLs is working for change, legally.

Stay strong, and wear your title of "subversive" with pride!

WMD

Kestryll

07-30-2007, 7:52 PM

sub·ver·sive
adjective
Definition:
designed to overthrow government: intended or likely to overthrow a government or other institution

Let's see, we do NOT wish to overthrow the government, we make every effort to remian 'letter of the law legal' and we heavily discourage illegal activities and suggestions.

Our goal is the enforcement of the documents written by the Founding Fathers on which this Country is based.

The current outcry towards any government body, the DOJ, has been simply 'Do your job'.

Nope, doesn't sound subversive to me.

tiki

07-30-2007, 7:57 PM

Let's see, we do NOT wish to overthrow the government, we make every effort to remian 'letter of the law legal' and we heavily discourage illegal activities and suggestions.

Our goal is the enforcement of the documents written by the Founding Fathers on which this Country is based.

The current outcry towards any government body, the DOJ, has been simply 'Do your job'.

Nope, doesn't sound subversive to me.

I don't want to overthrow government, however, I would like to replace some of the idiots with more competent and qualified leaders.

gn3hz3ku1*

07-30-2007, 8:01 PM

i will do anything to ensure our government stays the way the founding fathers decided it would... CA DOJ, are you an american organization?

Kestryll

07-30-2007, 8:15 PM

i will do anything to ensure our government stays the way the founding fathers decided it would... CA DOJ, are you an american organization?

I'm leaving this up to make a point otherwise I would normally edit or delete comments like that.

Do you see where that could be taken as a 'veiled threat'?
We need to realize, especially in light of this thread, that our words can be turned against us. This does not mean that we can not talk and share our opinions and views, just that we have to be aware of the image presented to an outside observer.

This comment, however benign it was intended, can easily be taken out of context and given the appearance of being a threat to a government office.

By giving them ammo we weaken ourselves. We give them the means to nibble away at us and slowly errode the numbers of those who can or will stand up for the Constitution and the rule of law.
We fight our 'battles' within the law and try to work within the system to effect change. Not only is this not 'subversive' it is the spirit and intent of the Founders.

Let's not 'arm' the 'opposition' and cost ourselves more ground.

artherd

07-30-2007, 8:27 PM

Um.... CRT wasn't implying that he literally picked a fight (physical altercation) with Iggy. There were some shady goings-on and CRT called Iggy on them. I do believe that's using the pen/words you are referring to, don't you think?

Nevermind, I was speaking of verbal altercations vs Writs of Mandate, etc.

Never even thought of a physical aspect, but I could see how I could be interpreted that way.

Piper

07-30-2007, 9:04 PM

I'm leaving this up to make a point otherwise I would normally edit or delete comments like that.

Do you see where that could be taken as a 'veiled threat'?
We need to realize, especially in light of this thread, that our words can be turned against us. This does not mean that we can not talk and share our opinions and views, just that we have to be aware of the image presented to an outside observer.

This comment, however benign it was intended, can easily be taken out of context and given the appearance of being a threat to a government office.

By giving them ammo we weaken ourselves. We give them the means to nibble away at us and slowly errode the numbers of those who can or will stand up for the Constitution and the rule of law.
We fight our 'battles' within the law and try to work within the system to effect change. Not only is this not 'subversive' it is the spirit and intent of the Founders.

Let's not 'arm' the 'opposition' and cost ourselves more ground.

I don't want t go off topic, but I think that this article is an important read and something to consider. I think we as law abiding citizens want to do the right thing, and deep inside we want to believe that our governments are working in our best interests, but I think this article is an important reminder of exactly how our forefathers responded to tyrany. We are at the beginnings of that, and to deny that, we are simply putting our heads in the sand.
http://www.isil.org/resources/lit/gun-contrl-patriotism.html . Is this subversive enough for you?

Enjoy

jimx

07-30-2007, 9:26 PM

While I DO fully agree that this idea of voiding gun establishments I do unfortunately have to play somwhat of Devil's advocate here and say I used to have to say much the same thing to some of my employees; precisely that thier outside activies MAY/WILL get them removed from the job. 1 (ONE) ticket would not be a problem...while two or a DUI infraction would cause them to loose thier job (our insurance would not cover them); likewise with convictions.... something like loitering or vandalism aint that big a deal to us-- but a drug conviction, theft, or assualt/battery charge would also get them removed......... they'd work around people and have access to lots of rather tempting items. As far as the drug-usage concern- our Director couldn't have cared less if they tested positive for cannibus but it was a direct fire (or no hire for 1 year) if they tested positive for anything else (they didn't have a prescription for).
But this...this.....is absurd for an otherwise completely legal/legit activity. God save us all.

Illegal outside actives are defiantly grounds for termination. I send my employees to the police department to get “live scan”. That way if anyone gets nailed for a crime involving violence or a minor I get notified. It may be an invasion of privacy but it is required by State law. It also weeds out potential problem employees.
Legal outside actives are often regulated by many places, everything from smoking cigarettes to posing in Playboy. Personally I would have a problem with an employee that belongs to the KKK but if I told my insurance agent that I banned everyone from going on gun websites at home he would have a heart attack.

I knew of a dealership in MI that wouldn't let their techs do ANY outside work. One got fired for installing a stereo for a secretary who worked at the same dealership. Dealers don't install stereos!

While this seems over the top I do understand why companies have that rule. I pay a decent wage, most are over $20 and a couple are over $30 per hour (+benefits). When someone comes to work I do not want them burned out from working a second job.
If the person is doing side work related to his regular job problems can reflect negatively on you.
There are also liability issues. Recently I had a guy do a side job over the weekend, came in Monday morning said he hurt his shoulder. Finds out it’s a torn rotator cuff. Did he injure it working for me or the landlord? Well I carry workers comp so it is on me.
And lastly you have to treat everyone equal. If they fired people in the past or leaving open the possibility of it in the future they would be risking a lawsuit.

M. Sage

07-30-2007, 9:34 PM

While this seems over the top I do understand why companies have that rule. I pay a decent wage, most are over $20 and a couple are over $30 per hour (+benefits). When someone comes to work I do not want them burned out from working a second job.
If the person is doing side work related to his regular job problems can reflect negatively on you.
There are also liability issues. Recently I had a guy do a side job over the weekend, came in Monday morning said he hurt his shoulder. Finds out it’s a torn rotator cuff. Did he injure it working for me or the landlord? Well I carry workers comp so it is on me.
And lastly you have to treat everyone equal. If they fired people in the past or leaving open the possibility of it in the future they would be risking a lawsuit.

If they come in burnt out from doing side-work, their on-clock work will suffer. That's grounds for firing. Liability? You're nicer than the employer I had where I injured my back during work, didn't realize it, and couldn't move the next day. I got not one cent of comp, despite the fact that I screwed a disc up working on that damn Corvette.

Whenever I do work on the side, I'm pretty clear that it's side-work, and my employer's got nothing to do with it. That's grounds for firing, too.

Being paid well is great, and I fell I'm well-paid, but a little extra money now and then is a good thing. It's where I get my play funds.

I guess I feel it's up to the employee to know when to say when with side-work, and if he overdoes it, firing is perfectly fine. But to say that an employee can't do something that doesn't affect his/her work performance on his/her own time.. that drives me nuts, and you'll never find me in the employ of someone who feels that I owe them that much.

BlueOvalBruin

07-30-2007, 9:40 PM

Can't these police officers just complain to their union about these off-hour recreational activity restrictions. I thought this is what unions were for.

lawnrevenge

07-30-2007, 10:28 PM

My employer make all new employees sign an agreement that they will not work for competing engineering offices or do engineering work on the side that the company could do. So I can get a second job at Walmart, but I can't do civil engineering on the side. I understand why this is outlined. If I do a job on the side I would make huge profits and be a direct competition with my employer.
When my employer starts telling me what to mot do off hours, that isn't work related, then there is a huge problem. I quit my last job because my employer was harassing me about my gun hobby. It all started when on a lunch break I talked about hunting with a coworker and another anti-coworker overheard, they told me I was not allowed to talk about guns and if I did again I'd be terminated. I had a new job two weeks later, with better pay and my new boss has a 50 caliber rifle. Our front desk secretary's husband got me up to speed on OLL. I got our survey department head into shooting...
Taking back your rights, starting with your right to get a better job, is always a good thing. No one is forcing you to work in a crappy place.

artherd

07-30-2007, 11:24 PM

lawnrevenge, hey there's still room to move up; if you ever want to jump ship and work for me, your boss would have a semi-automatic .50caliber rifle ;)

I allow some side-work, I even let my guys use the tools (especially if the side work is for family members, which it usually is) with a few simple rules; 1) you are not to compete with me directly (I don't want $300 drywall jobs but please don't take a $400k subdivision)
2) it is not to effect your work when you get back.
3) pay for gas burned on company equipment.

CRTguns

07-31-2007, 2:01 AM

I stated earlier that the CHP had revoked the letters thay had written to register ARs as personal rifles...Learned, or at least heard, from a CHP that recently,( 2-3 months) a CHP in stockton area took the freedoms granted by his letter too far and installed a 37mm or 40mm on his AR, thinking he was covered by the registration. No details were given as to what did or did not happen to cause the decision, but the newly issued letters were pulled, and the CHPs were instructed to un-assaultify the rifles.

Maybe just heresay, bu that's what I was told by one CHP.

CalNRA

07-31-2007, 3:15 AM

I stated earlier that the CHP had revoked the letters thay had written to register ARs as personal rifles...Learned, or at least heard, from a CHP that recently,( 2-3 months) a CHP in stockton area took the freedoms granted by his letter too far and installed a 37mm or 40mm on his AR, thinking he was covered by the registration. No details were given as to what did or did not happen to cause the decision, but the newly issued letters were pulled, and the CHPs were instructed to un-assaultify the rifles.

Maybe just heresay, bu that's what I was told by one CHP.

isn't that a federal DD offense? :eek:

couldn't they(CHP) just like take away the rifle and let the other guys keep their regular AWs?

tiki

07-31-2007, 6:52 AM

... a CHP in stockton area took the freedoms granted by his letter too far and installed a 37mm or 40mm on his AR, thinking he was covered by the registration.

Isn't that how it usually goes? Everything is ok and then someone has to push the limits and hose it for everyone?

thisismyboomstick

07-31-2007, 8:30 AM

I stated earlier that the CHP had revoked the letters thay had written to register ARs as personal rifles...Learned, or at least heard, from a CHP that recently,( 2-3 months) a CHP in stockton area took the freedoms granted by his letter too far and installed a 37mm or 40mm on his AR, thinking he was covered by the registration. No details were given as to what did or did not happen to cause the decision, but the newly issued letters were pulled, and the CHPs were instructed to un-assaultify the rifles.

Maybe just heresay, bu that's what I was told by one CHP.

I believe a 37 would be covered by the registration. It's just adding another evil feature like a flashider or pistol grip. A 40 is in and of itself a class 3 item.

WolfMansDad

07-31-2007, 9:11 AM

Thanks for the link, Piper. It was a good read and very subversive.

The distinguishing characteristic of this type of patriotism is that citizens don't make independent, personal judgments of the rightness or wrongness of a law. Instead, he does what he has been taught since the first grade of his government-approved schools: they place unwavering faith and trust in the judgment of their popularly-elected public officials.

The other concept of patriotism was the type which characterized the British colonists during the late 1700s. They believed that patriotism meant a devotion to certain principles of rightness and morality. They believed that the good citizen had the duty to make an independent judgment as to whether or not his own government's laws violated these principles. And so, unlike their counterparts in America today, these individuals refused to automatically accept the legitimacy of the actions of their public officials.

Two points. First, those government-run schools we all go to teach that there is no such thing as an objective standard of right and wrong. Ethics are decided by consensus, so the individual is not able to make these judgements alone. The whole concept of absolute morality is ridiculed. Kids are taught not to make value judgements for fear of being labelled "judgemental" or "intolerant." Given this kind of conditioning, the 1700s kind of patriotism described in the article is not possible.

Second, even if we did decide that a law was wrong, we couldn't advocate breaking it in an online forum. Advocating illegal activity is against the forum rules.

I think both of these developments are sad, but there they are.

homerm14

07-31-2007, 11:17 AM

I work for one of the larger agencies in the state and have heard nothing. If I do I will keep you posted.

M. Sage

07-31-2007, 5:45 PM

isn't that a federal DD offense? :eek:

couldn't they(CHP) just like take away the rifle and let the other guys keep their regular AWs?

37mm isn't a GL, it's a flare-launcher, so if it was that it'd be OK.

40mm would be NFA and CA DD.

jdberger

07-31-2007, 6:20 PM

Thanks for the link, Piper. It was a good read and very subversive.

Two points. First, those government-run schools we all go to teach that there is no such thing as an objective standard of right and wrong. Ethics are decided by consensus, so the individual is not able to make these judgements alone. The whole concept of absolute morality is ridiculed. Kids are taught not to make value judgements for fear of being labelled "judgemental" or "intolerant." Given this kind of conditioning, the 1700s kind of patriotism described in the article is not possible.

Second, even if we did decide that a law was wrong, we couldn't advocate breaking it in an online forum. Advocating illegal activity is against the forum rules.

I think both of these developments are sad, but there they are.

Are you sure about this? I know that this is the standard "party line" but it sure didn't happen at any of the "government run schools" I went to, and I attended quite a few.

Creeping Incrementalism

07-31-2007, 6:43 PM

I quit my last job because my employer was harassing me about my gun hobby. It all started when on a lunch break I talked about hunting with a coworker and another anti-coworker overheard, they told me I was not allowed to talk about guns and if I did again I'd be terminated.

That has to be about the most gun-unfriendly workplace I've heard of: someone eavesdropping on a private conversation about a legal and common activity, and then being told even mentioning it again will get you fired?

Piper

07-31-2007, 6:49 PM

Are you sure about this? I know that this is the standard "party line" but it sure didn't happen at any of the "government run schools" I went to, and I attended quite a few.

It's interesting that you should say that. In fact just today in my sociology class, my very left wing KPFK (Leftwing "progressive" radio) listening instructor proudly raised up his copy of the Communist Manefesto and talked about the "good" things that were in that thin book. Not to discount what you've said, but I've known several conservative teachers that send their kids to private school because of the values that they see being taught in the schools that they teach in. But hey, let's get back on topic.

gazzavc

07-31-2007, 7:42 PM

It's interesting that you should say that. In fact just today in my sociology class, my very left wing KPFK (Leftwing "progressive" radio) listening instructor proudly raised up his copy of the Communist Manefesto and talked about the "good" things that were in that thin book. Not to discount what you've said, but I've known several conservative teachers that send their kids to private school because of the values that they see being taught in the schools that they teach in. But hey, let's get back on topic.

The communist manifesto is a wonderful book, and just the right size for propping up the wobbly leg of my gun cleaning bench.............:D:D:D (Dry British humor, insert canned laughter here)

Piper

07-31-2007, 8:58 PM

The communist manifesto is a wonderful book, and just the right size for propping up the wobbly leg of my gun cleaning bench.............:D:D:D (Dry British humor, insert canned laughter here)

Not to mention other uses like getting a warm fire started on a cold night.

heyjak

07-31-2007, 9:16 PM

that this thread has drifted WAY off-topic, did B Wiese get the information he asked for?:confused:

AJAX22

07-31-2007, 9:20 PM

I believe a 37 would be covered by the registration. It's just adding another evil feature like a flashider or pistol grip. A 40 is in and of itself a class 3 item.

That is correct,

However, if he had any 'anti personell ammunition' like CS or baton rounds for his 37mm launcher, then the launcher itself becomes a DD under California Law.

swhatb

08-01-2007, 12:06 AM

Sure it is possible to intimidate some of us but administrators and DOJ should be very wary of taking any action against CA Leo's 1st Amend. rights of association for participation in legal activities and discussions. POA (peace officer association) attorneys are very powerful and effective in protecting their members against such discriminatory and disciplinary action. If my dept. every said anything to me about a legal activity done off duty letters from my legal rep. should give them caution! I'm a public servant on duty but nobody's slave off duty.

ditto...

CalNRA

08-01-2007, 2:26 AM

37mm isn't a GL, it's a flare-launcher, so if it was that it'd be OK.

40mm would be NFA and CA DD.

gotya.

jdberger

08-01-2007, 8:17 AM

It's interesting that you should say that. In fact just today in my sociology class, my very left wing KPFK (Leftwing "progressive" radio) listening instructor proudly raised up his copy of the Communist Manefesto and talked about the "good" things that were in that thin book. Not to discount what you've said, but I've known several conservative teachers that send their kids to private school because of the values that they see being taught in the schools that they teach in. But hey, let's get back on topic.

That's College, where you are supposed to be exposed to a variety of opinions (yes, I know that most are lefty). Not the lower grades as WMD implied.

The Manifesto has some great ideas - if you read them in a vacuum. Counter it. Bring in a hardback version of Atlas Shrugged and keep it on your desk.

C.G.

08-01-2007, 10:53 AM

It's interesting that you should say that. In fact just today in my sociology class, my very left wing KPFK (Leftwing "progressive" radio) listening instructor proudly raised up his copy of the Communist Manefesto and talked about the "good" things that were in that thin book. Not to discount what you've said, but I've known several conservative teachers that send their kids to private school because of the values that they see being taught in the schools that they teach in. But hey, let's get back on topic.

Obviously your teacher hasn't lived in a country that subscribed to communism.

jdberger

08-01-2007, 11:16 AM

Obviously your teacher hasn't lived in a country that subscribed to communism.

Oh, c'mon, CG. Don't you know that those countries just weren't the right ones to start a communist government. Cuba's a socialist paradise. Michael Moore says so! :rofl2:

C.G.

08-01-2007, 4:41 PM

Cuba's a socialist paradise. Michael Moore says so! :rofl2:

It must be true, then!:smilielol5:

Piper

08-02-2007, 1:49 PM

Obviously your teacher hasn't lived in a country that subscribed to communism.

It's probably not as bad, but he says he came from El Salvador.

Davidwhitewolf

08-02-2007, 3:46 PM

Back on topic, I think this aspect of our Labor Code is, if not unique to California, at least pretty rare among the other States.

(a) Forbidding or preventing employees from engaging or participating in politics or from becoming candidates for public office.

(b) Controlling or directing, or tending to control or direct the political activities or affiliations of employees.

Lab C § 1102. No employer shall coerce or influence or attempt to coerce or influence his employees through or by means of threat of discharge or loss of employment to adopt or follow or refrain from adopting or following any particular course or line of political action or political activity.

tacticalcity

08-02-2007, 3:46 PM

I kinda like where this thread ended up :43:

I loved having debates with liberals about the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and so on. None of them had even been there, yet they all seemed to know exactly what it was like and how much better the rest of the world is compared to the United States (their opinion, not mine).

Thanks to the US Air Force I've seen these places. I've lived there and seen how the average public in these countries is treated by their governments. People have no idea how good we have it in America, or why it is so important we hang onto every single right we have without exception - no matter what the downsides are. They have no idea just how horrifing the alternative is. I do. I've seen it.